[michael21]

Originally Posted by Patrick

Is it?

I mean can you still become one of those people like my Grandmother who can't stop smoking?

Or does it still increase your risk of Lung Cancer as much as it would if you smoked packet after packet?

no that not bad is it you that smokes? 1 pack a day is fine but dont go over that

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by michael21

1 pack a day is fine but dont go over that

LMAO. Yes, it is fine. Just ask this guy...

[michael21]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

LMAO. Yes, it is fine. Just ask this guy...

I dont smoke you should be telling patrick

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by michael21

I dont smoke you should be telling patrick

You said 1 pack a day is, and I quote, "fine". Bit of a wrong choice of words.

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

To come onto a forum and declare that ANY smoking 'is not that bad' is sheer ignorance and idiocy, not to mention, complete and utter rubbish.

We agree on something. Woohoo.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

You said 1 pack a day is, and I quote, "fine". Bit of a wrong choice of words.



We agree on something. Woohoo.

LOL. You know, I did laugh and thought the same thing!!!

[arista]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

LMAO. Yes, it is fine. Just ask this guy...

Yes and as Pat is getting Heavy so young
it will be even Worse.


No Need To Smoke.

Will Power - can stop anything.

[Stu]

Smoking a pack a month is vastly inconsequential to your health I imagine. That's like what ... two thirds of a cigarette a day? Your lungs would be clearing back out the smoke far faster than you could possibly clog it up at that rate. In pure statistical terms your risk of cancer would go up, sure, but 0.66% of a cigarette a day ... seriously?

Problem is very few people can stick to one fag a day. It's incredibly difficult. This is all common knowledge surely. And TiBB is really not the best place to use as a compass to gauge what crazy directions you could next take your teenage life.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Stu

Smoking a pack a month is vastly inconsequential to your health I imagine. That's like what ... two thirds of a cigarette a day? Your lungs would be clearing back out the smoke far faster than you could possibly clog it up at that rate. In pure statistical terms your risk of cancer would go up, sure, but 0.66% of a cigarette a day ... seriously?

Problem is very few people can stick to one fag a day. It's incredibly difficult. This is all common knowledge surely. And TiBB is really not the best place to use as a compass to gauge what crazy directions you could next take your teenage life.

Stu that one of you best post

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Stu

Smoking a pack a month is vastly inconsequential to your health I imagine. That's like what ... two thirds of a cigarette a day? Your lungs would be clearing back out the smoke far faster than you could possibly clog it up at that rate. In pure statistical terms your risk of cancer would go up, sure, but 0.66% of a cigarette a day ... seriously?

Problem is very few people can stick to one fag a day. It's incredibly difficult. This is all common knowledge surely. And TiBB is really not the best place to use as a compass to gauge what crazy directions you could next take your teenage life.

Agree. Especially in red.

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Stu

Smoking a pack a month is vastly inconsequential to your health I imagine. That's like what ... two thirds of a cigarette a day? Your lungs would be clearing back out the smoke far faster than you could possibly clog it up at that rate. In pure statistical terms your risk of cancer would go up, sure, but 0.66% of a cigarette a day ... seriously?

That isn't the problem with cigarettes

The chemicals in cigarettes break down the walls of the alveoli in the lungs, which means the diffusion pathway between the lungs and bloodstream is increased because the walls have been damaged, less oxygen gets into the blood which is why people suffer problems with shortness of breath...



So, yes, in short, any smoking is bad for you and damages your lungs, but If you're going to smoke, then it's better a pack a month then a pack a week I suppose >_>


omg, my education came in handy somewhere

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Smithy

That isn't the problem with cigarettes

The chemicals in cigarettes break down the walls of the alveoli in the lungs, which means the diffusion pathway between the lungs and bloodstream is increased because the walls have been damaged, less oxygen gets into the blood which is why people suffer problems with shortness of breath...



So, yes, in short, any smoking is bad for you and damages your lungs, but If you're going to smoke, then it's better a pack a month then a pack a week I suppose >_>


omg, my education came in handy somewhere

Less chemicals means less breakdown. The lungs can repair themselves. It's one of the biggest reasons why doctors advise people to still quit because such good can come of it even if they were chronic smokers for years. You would want to have the most pissant lungs imaginable and some bad luck to boot if 240 cigarettes a year were to seriously make permanent long term inroads into destroying your health.

Besides cigarettes pose multiple possible threats of lung complications not just Emphysema which is the main problem in what you are pointing out. What makes you think my argument was only applicable to that?

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Stu

Less chemicals means less breakdown. The lungs can repair themselves. It's one of the biggest reasons why doctors advise people to still quit because such good can come of it even if they were chronic smokers for years. You would want to have the most pissant lungs imaginable and some bad luck to boot if 240 cigarettes a year were to seriously make permanent long term inroads into destroying your health.

Besides cigarettes pose multiple possible threats of lung complications not just Emphysema which is the main problem in what you are pointing out. What makes you think my argument was only applicable to that?

Yes, they can, but it takes a lot of time, having one cigarette every few days, is still going to damage them, and doctors say that, but that still means that you aren't going to be smoking... :S

And I wasn't referring to emphysema, it was just the just the first accurate picture I saw, I didn't read the writing.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Smithy

Yes, they can, but it takes a lot of time, having one cigarette every few days, is still going to damage them, and doctors say that, but that still means that you aren't going to be smoking... :S

And I wasn't referring to emphysema, it was just the just the first accurate picture I saw, I didn't read the writing.

Well of course doctors say that. Smoking one cigarette will damage the lungs of course but you have to put a bit of perspective on it and measure the amount of damage 4 cigarettes a week is doing versus the bodies ability to repair itself.

Of course it also depends on the rest of your lifestyle. A cheeseburger a week don't mean shit if you jog every morning, playa.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by michael21

no that not bad is it you that smokes? 1 pack a day is fine but dont go over that

You know, I've yet to see any Health organisation advocate that - at all - regardless of amount.

I smoke. Have done for years. Am fully aware of how bad it is but that's my choice.

To come onto a forum and declare that ANY smoking 'is not that bad' is sheer ignorance and idiocy, not to mention, complete and utter rubbish.

[michael21]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

You know, I've yet to see any Health organisation advocate that - at all - regardless of amount.

I smoke. Have done for years. Am fully aware of how bad it is but that's my choice.

To come onto a forum and declare that ANY smoking 'is not that bad' is sheer ignorance and idiocy, not to mention, complete and utter rubbish.

we all no smoking is bad for you so what the point of this thread?

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by michael21

we all no smoking is bad for you so what the point of this thread?

Really? can you explain your comment "No, it's not that bad". It's either bad for you or it's not. clearly you aren't quite sure.

as for what the point of this thread is? I didn't start the thread - better ask Patrick.